You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.03 AVERAGE
4.03 AVERAGE
A sharp social commentary on capitalism vs communism and American foreign policy.
"I offered them Utopia, but they fought for the right to live in Hell."
"I offered them Utopia, but they fought for the right to live in Hell."
Superman: Red Son is Mark Millar’s 2004 effort to re-imagine superman having crash landed on a collectivist farm in Russia instead of Ma and Pa Kent’s farm in Kansas. It's an interesting idea to put him in this context and at times it makes Superman new and different and at times presents him as strangely familiar. To separate him from the American way is to see the ways he can be a critique of our own government and our own decisions as a nation and our own way of life. Superman, after all, is an idea. And we have always had to meet that idea half way between our minds and the page to help create him and to fill in the parts that the comic book doesn't address. Sure he can lift a car over his head, but who does he vote for? He is a Republican right? He believes in the things Barak Obama is saying doesn't he? We have always filled in the area that comics can't or won't and that often includes moral grey areas. Do you think Superman is cheating on Lois with Wonder Woman? No one would ever find out… The idea of a moral grey area in a Superman comic is attractive because we don't often get grey area with him. So much of the superman legend is black and white, good and evil and that is the main complaint about him and the main thing that makes his story so attractive. Millar’s book is an effort to examine some of those notions of good and evil and to learn a little more about Superman and about why he is so important to us.
The first thing Millar discovers is that Superman is a better us. In this story he is very much who we and who we strive to be. But we already knew that. But for the first time, this better version of us considers the questions: What is the right thing to do? What is the right way to live? It is a philosophical question that comic books (the news, film, literature) too often take for granted.
One thing Millar uncovers right away is how lucky we are to be born where we are born. In this story, Superman becomes emblematic of that. Citizenship is such an accident. In the Superman myth with which we are familiar, Superman could exist in nowhere but America. He is the ultimate immigrant story (as we learned from The Adventures of Kavelier and Clay). But in Millar’s story, Supes could have happened anywhere. In Millar’s story Superman teaches us how important it is that we make the most of what we are given. He changes the world around him by being better than everyone else. So Millar’s argument is that no matter where this superman landed he would make it better.
Millar also reveals, and here is where it gets interesting, how incredibly naïve Superman is. This story does a nice job capturing that. It is his tragic flaw. It is his faith and hope and belief that undoes him. And this is what the story gets right. This is what makes the story worth reading, because it is certainly a book worth reading.
But, the ideas presented, however interesting , are simply not taken far enough. Millar tries to divorce us from our preconceptions, but it's the sort of divorce where, after the paperwork is signed, the ex never leaves the house. Millar still presents communism as this inherently flawed concept (ships don't even have life boats any more because everyone knows superman will save them if anything goes wrong), but he doesn't really consider Capitalism in the same way.
Superman is presented as this version of Julius Caesar who does not want the power he is handed but once he accepts it, he refuses to relinquish it. But we never see him forced to make difficult decisions. We never see him struggle to decide. We never see him choose the lesser of two evils. If he really wanted to make Superman into this Caesaresque character he should have invented a new political animal (call it krypto-socialism), otherwise we are just beating a dead horse. Really? The Soviet Union is imperfect? It's 2004. This would have been important to say 20 years earlier than 2004, but not today.
And speaking of 1984, the concept of surveillance is another one that gets brought up and then is quickly forgotten. There could have been a whole issue dedicated to how life was different now that Supes knows everything you do and say and how that could change your decision making process. Supes doesn't want to censor you, Supes wants you to censor yourself.
This gets me to my central point, which is this needed at least 5 issues to tell the whole story, or even 10 to 12. There is a lot of Tell and not much Show, which is super rare for a comic book. There is probably more political positioning than your average comic book fan is used to, but done correctly it can be really compelling. Look at the show Homeland. The political debate in that show is complex and sophisticated and it is also really popular.
I don’t want you to think that this book is bad. It is not. Maybe my expectations are too high, but I don’t think that is a bad thing. Comics should strive to compete with mainstream literature because it can. Because we need it to. Let me tell you what the book does well. Millar is the rare writer that understands the way Green Lantern is supposed to work. Wonder Woman is a bit of an after thought here, but Batman is great. He is great right down to his alternate reality back story and his fur Ushanka with bat ears stitched on. When it comes down to it the book is far and away better than some Marvel re-imaginations like Punisher: Noir and Old Man Logan, but no where near as good as the DC classics Dark Knight Returns and Kingdom Come. (Why does DC do these so much better?)
The saddest part for me is that, contrary to popular belief, I think a comic book can be a place for taking on these big ideas and asking these big questions, but this one just wasn't up to the task. The central metaphor involving a shrunken city is a little under developed and the ideas just sort if get away from Millar. There could have been a cool turn where Luthor was looking to Superman for guidance the way Superman looked to Jor - El, but that opportunity escapes like so many others. Ultimately, Red Son is a missed opportunity.
Review Over
The first thing Millar discovers is that Superman is a better us. In this story he is very much who we and who we strive to be. But we already knew that. But for the first time, this better version of us considers the questions: What is the right thing to do? What is the right way to live? It is a philosophical question that comic books (the news, film, literature) too often take for granted.
One thing Millar uncovers right away is how lucky we are to be born where we are born. In this story, Superman becomes emblematic of that. Citizenship is such an accident. In the Superman myth with which we are familiar, Superman could exist in nowhere but America. He is the ultimate immigrant story (as we learned from The Adventures of Kavelier and Clay). But in Millar’s story, Supes could have happened anywhere. In Millar’s story Superman teaches us how important it is that we make the most of what we are given. He changes the world around him by being better than everyone else. So Millar’s argument is that no matter where this superman landed he would make it better.
Millar also reveals, and here is where it gets interesting, how incredibly naïve Superman is. This story does a nice job capturing that. It is his tragic flaw. It is his faith and hope and belief that undoes him. And this is what the story gets right. This is what makes the story worth reading, because it is certainly a book worth reading.
But, the ideas presented, however interesting , are simply not taken far enough. Millar tries to divorce us from our preconceptions, but it's the sort of divorce where, after the paperwork is signed, the ex never leaves the house. Millar still presents communism as this inherently flawed concept (ships don't even have life boats any more because everyone knows superman will save them if anything goes wrong), but he doesn't really consider Capitalism in the same way.
Superman is presented as this version of Julius Caesar who does not want the power he is handed but once he accepts it, he refuses to relinquish it. But we never see him forced to make difficult decisions. We never see him struggle to decide. We never see him choose the lesser of two evils. If he really wanted to make Superman into this Caesaresque character he should have invented a new political animal (call it krypto-socialism), otherwise we are just beating a dead horse. Really? The Soviet Union is imperfect? It's 2004. This would have been important to say 20 years earlier than 2004, but not today.
And speaking of 1984, the concept of surveillance is another one that gets brought up and then is quickly forgotten. There could have been a whole issue dedicated to how life was different now that Supes knows everything you do and say and how that could change your decision making process. Supes doesn't want to censor you, Supes wants you to censor yourself.
This gets me to my central point, which is this needed at least 5 issues to tell the whole story, or even 10 to 12. There is a lot of Tell and not much Show, which is super rare for a comic book. There is probably more political positioning than your average comic book fan is used to, but done correctly it can be really compelling. Look at the show Homeland. The political debate in that show is complex and sophisticated and it is also really popular.
I don’t want you to think that this book is bad. It is not. Maybe my expectations are too high, but I don’t think that is a bad thing. Comics should strive to compete with mainstream literature because it can. Because we need it to. Let me tell you what the book does well. Millar is the rare writer that understands the way Green Lantern is supposed to work. Wonder Woman is a bit of an after thought here, but Batman is great. He is great right down to his alternate reality back story and his fur Ushanka with bat ears stitched on. When it comes down to it the book is far and away better than some Marvel re-imaginations like Punisher: Noir and Old Man Logan, but no where near as good as the DC classics Dark Knight Returns and Kingdom Come. (Why does DC do these so much better?)
The saddest part for me is that, contrary to popular belief, I think a comic book can be a place for taking on these big ideas and asking these big questions, but this one just wasn't up to the task. The central metaphor involving a shrunken city is a little under developed and the ideas just sort if get away from Millar. There could have been a cool turn where Luthor was looking to Superman for guidance the way Superman looked to Jor - El, but that opportunity escapes like so many others. Ultimately, Red Son is a missed opportunity.
Review Over
Another in the syllabus of graphic novel classics I've been recommended, this is a re-imagining in which Superman crashes in 1938 Ukraine, and is raised as a champion of Stalinism. With a clever references to other superheroes and historical in-jokes, this underlines the ridiculousness of Superman being American and asks some genuinely important questions about power and responsibility.
Exciting premise. Unfortunately, the politics get barely explored at all. Instead the author is more interested in just mixing up superhero stuff. At the end we in essence get a battle of planned economies which the author apparently sees as the best system without seeing the need to justify such a childish vision.
Interesting twist on the Superman tale. It assumes that Superman is basically good by nature, but that being nurtured in a Soviet collective instead of a Kansas farming community leads to him being more willing to take the authoritarian route to solving the world's problems.
A very compelling “What If” story that I almost abandoned in the second third. The first part had a good set up, the second part started to lull and feel a bit aimless. But be the end of the second part, and throughout the third, the story really pays off.
Even though politics are central to the plot, there’s never a point in which the book preaches any political points to the reader. It feels natural based on history.
Even though politics are central to the plot, there’s never a point in which the book preaches any political points to the reader. It feels natural based on history.
Maybe it's because I am not a big Superman fan, but I thought this was just OK. It just seemed rushed. I was hoping for a little bit more depth.
adventurous
dark
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I liked it but I wish the politics were more nuanced, like when Luther took over he was literally practicing a form of state capitalism with a centralized economy, I don’t think anarchist Batman would be down with that. Either the writer doesn’t like anarchists or doesn’t understand them, either way it was strange that an anarchist fighting against hierarchy would work FOR the United States and Luther.